Oxford Journals is celebrating Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s 300th birthday by granting free access to many papers relevant to his work and thought. Here’s a brief history of Rousseau:

[J]ean-Jacques Rousseau was one of the most influential thinkers during the Enlightenment in eighteenth century Europe. His first major philosophical work, A Discourse on the Sciences and Arts, was the winning response to an essay contest conducted by the Academy of Dijon in 1750. In this work, Rousseau argues that the progression of the sciences and arts has caused the corruption of virtue and morality. This discourse won Rousseau fame and recognition, and it laid much of the philosophical groundwork for a second, longer work, The Discourse on the Origin of Inequality. The second discourse did not win the Academy’s prize, but like the first, it was widely read and further solidified Rousseau’s place as a significant intellectual figure.

I was quite surprised as I checked my Twitter feed this morning to find out that Richard Dawkins released another statement declaring his obstinate refusal to debate Christian philosopher and theologian William Lane Craig. To much disappointment, the only excuses were based in mockery, arrogance, and hypocrisy.

Dawkins’ arrogant mockery of Craig. Dawkins minimizes Craig for who he is in academia by suggesting that “maybe he is a ‘theologian.'” I can see the Oxford professor doing the air quotes and saying with his germane English accent. He acts as if no one in academia has ever heard of Craig and that he’s the equivalent of a community college professor trying to make it big. Craig doesn’t need anything added to his CV, it’s already quite extensive and accomplished (as well as his publications). I’m not sure how he can honestly say that he has not heard of Craig (being that he shared a stage with him at Ciudad de las Ideas). Obviously, he knows who he is now (at least some aspects of him) but he needs to stop playing the tune of not knowing who he is and this CV jargon. All Dawkins mentions on his schedule is that he is promoting a film “No Dinosaurs in Heaven” for October 25 when Craig is to debate Dawkins (leaving an empty chair with dire hopes of Dawkins showing up). Oh, by the way, don’t pay attention to William Lane Craig’s events listed on Dawkins’ schedule. Evidently, Dawkins doesn’t manage his own schedule because, as you’ll recall, he doesn’t know who Craig is…

Dawkins’ hypocrisy. Dawkins caricatures Craig’s position with his megalomaniac-of-a-God argument by suggesting Craig argues for a God of genocide. Okay, make the claim that this is what Craig believes, which isn’t true, but he goes on to construct an argument against Craig in this press release. Wait a second, is he engaging in Craig’s thought here? If yes, then why not commit to a substantive dialogue focused on, say, divine command theory? If not, then it’s quite hypocritical. Additionally, the hypocrisy shines when he will debate Alister McGrath and John Lennox (who both believe in inerrancy and would [I believe] defend divine command theory) but not Craig. Surely, atheists have to be seeing this.

PZ Myers’ tomfoolery. Myers posted an article on his blog this morning titled “Standing up to William Lane Craig.” Most people in the scientific and philosophical blogosphere familiar with this arena of thought understand that Myers is admittedly outspoken, rude, and angry. Sure, that’s not my preference but okay, he can be that way. I don’t care too much about that. What I find interesting is that he supports Dawkins’ refusal to debate Craig and considers it a “terrific put-down.” He goes on to say,

My only reaction to this is simply laugh. No serious academic or inquirer for the truth can take these comments seriously. I think it’s an amazing demonstration of lack of substantive retort and refusal to dialogue. Dawkins and Myers simply want to monologue and when someone wants to engage, shame on that fool for thinking differently. So much for free thought, right?

The thing is, Craig has already taken on the leading atheists and to top Dawkins would be too much of a blow for the atheist camp. He is their last hope for saving face in the public sphere. Now, I’m not going to suggest that atheism has been dismantled in academia, because it hasn’t. The purpose of debating is to bring the issues to a public forum and let the premises and arguments, which underlie these competing worldviews, be heard, examined, matched against peers, and argued against (which helps prevent strawmen). Debating isn’t an academic double-blind – journal and no one ever said it was. I suspect Dawkins isn’t the most adept debater and that’s okay. I would be content with him saying that he isn’t sufficient in a formal oral debate and would prefer more of an academic review/written debate (and leave formal oral debates to those who can). That’s fine with me.

Paradoxically, I believe Dawkins’ lack of debate is a bigger defeat for new atheism then if he did debate Craig. It says so much more than if they were to engage in substantive dialogue because it demonstrates the new atheists’ desire of monologue. They want to shout on their blogs and books that there is no God (or on busses that there probably isn’t a God). If you stand up to question them they have nothing to respond with but strawmen arguments. So much for standing up to William Lane Craig, this is more of a stepping-to-the-side and getting out of his way.

There have been quite the development of criticisms of Richard Dawkins in the last few weeks in light of his denial to debate Christian philosopher William Lane Craig. I’ve been a participant in the blogosphere and in the forums and I’m familiar with what others are saying about everything. The basic principle that’s being asserted is that Dawkins will have a monologue concerning his arguments against God but he will not dialogue about it. I mean really, why debate the existence of fictitious entities and fairies?

What if I told you it’s possible to get a free theological education online? It’s well known that one can get a degree online these days; more and more schools are making their courses available on “virtual campuses.” They include the same lectures you would hear in the classroom—just recorded and posted online. Applying for school online has become a viable option, especially for those whose current walk in life makes them unwilling or unable to move across country to be on campus.

But let’s say you don’t want to actually enroll in a program and dish out the money for a degree. (Maybe you already have another degree, or are in the workforce, or ministry). Can you still get a theological education for free? You sure can: many Christian colleges and seminaries have posted classes to download for free on iTunes U. So much so, you can build your own curriculum rivaling the amount of classroom time it would take to actually go to school. At the end of your studies you won’t get a piece of paper to hang on the wall and show your friends, but you will learn a lot that God will be able to use for your ministry.

If you’re feeling led to do this, I’d recommend downloading a flash card program like Anki http://ankisrs.net/ and building flash card decks full of only the information you hear in the lectures you want to stick in your brain. Don’t go crazy building a huge deck of cards you’ll feel overwhelmed with; just put stuff on there you actually want to be able to quote off the top of your head. Then incorporate a daily (or weekly) time of study into your life. Just listen to a lecture (taking notes or adding info to your Anki deck), and then go over your flashcards again for the day. Anki is really cool because it’s designed upon an algorithm that works with the way we learn—so you only have to designate a set amount of time you want to study each day and over time you will master large amounts of material.

The time is going to pass either way: a year from now either you will have absorbed the equivalent of a master’s degree of knowledge, or not. I’m just telling you that you can do it for free!

Check out the links below for schools that have courses online, and my own ideas for putting together a curriculum.

I stuck with only links through iTunes U (except for William Lane Craig’s Defender’s class, and Dan Wallace’s material, because I couldn’t resist) but obviously you don’t have to limit yourself to this; there are also awesome podcasts that you could learn from that are not affiliated with a Christian university. Just go for it!

I’ve provided a list of recommended books that will hopefully aid you in having a foundational Christian worldview by being knowledgeable in many fields. Today I’ve provided a list of my top ten recommended science books.

10. The Oxford Companion Series: These books are quick and easy to read set up in a dictionary format for easy reference. When you come across terms like inflationary perturbations you have something to help you understand what it is you’re dealing with. These are available in many fields of science.

8. The Inflationary Universe by Alan Guth: Guth is the father of inflationary cosmology and this work is seminal in its field. Read this book, familiarize yourself with the concepts and consider the implications that inflationary cosmology may or may not have. This is the leading thought in cosmology, get to know it.

7. Darwinism, Design, and Public Education by John Angus Campbell and Stephen C. Meyer: Campbell and Meyer offer a rather detailed discourse on the state of evolution and design in academia and the public sphere. Though this isn’t primarily a scientific text it will help acclimate you to where the discussions are and where they are going.

6. Q is for Quantum by John Gribbin: Gribbin’s book is a systematic set of concepts, people, interpretations, and terms that is easy to follow and understand. Consider this the Oxford Companion on steroids.

5. More Than A Theory: Revealing a Testable Model for Creation by Hugh Ross: Ross is a Christian astrophysicist from the science think tank Reasons to Believe. What I appreciate about this book is that Ross puts the Christian doctrine of creation in empirical harms way. This is an excellent read and I highly recommend it.

4. Space, Time, and Spacetime by Lawrence Sklar: Sklar introduces the history and philosophy behind physics. Before diving deep into Einstein or Bohr try working through Sklar’s text as he guides your through the fundamentals of geometry, space, and other concepts crucial to having a solid understanding of physics.

3. Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design by Stephen Meyer: Meyer’s work is quite exhaustive in its attempt to consider the options for what is the source of the information required for life to exist. This isn’t the hardest work to read but it’s not a walk through the park either. Enjoy the several hundred pages as he discusses the role of information not only in biology but also as he briefly touches questions from cosmology.

2. A Matter of Days: Resolving a Creation Controversy and The Genesis Question: Scientific Advances and the Accuracy of Genesisby Hugh Ross: I had to use the two books in conjunction with one another. A Matter of Days provides the exegetical and hermeneutical aspect of creation and The Genesis Question correlates how the biblical text relates to the scientific questions. Though A Matter of Days isn’t a science book it does well with The Genesis Question being that when it comes to science, the doctrine of creation is most attacked doctrine. These two books will equip you biblically as well as scientifically.

1. The Nature of Nature: Examining the Role of Naturalism in Science by Bruce Gordon and William Dembski: Gordon and Dembski’s work is a series of papers and essays written by leading scholars in biology, cosmology, math, psychology, neuroscience, and philosophy. It discusses epistemic, metaphysical, and ontological aspects associated with science. This is essentially and philosophy of science text that allows you to develop theoretical approaches to interpreting the scientific facts. This is a must have.